PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION
Lecture 1
I. Introduction
A. The revolution in philosophy of religion
Philosophy seems to be mainly a western enterprise, comprised of investigations into metaphysics (the concept of reality, being, ontology, cosmology, and theology), epistemology, ethics, logic, aesthetics, social and political philosophy, and the many
“philosophies of…”: philosophy of language, philosophy of law, philosophy of science, and, of course, philosophy of religion.
Because of its western origin, the philosophy of religion was originally applied to the religion of the Judeo-Christian tradition and, because of the interest of Islamic scholars in Aristotle during the middle ages, to that religion as well. The concept of a monotheistic God so closely connected to two other religions made the analysis of the concepts of these religions a task similar in each.
But now we have to recognize that there are many religious traditions in the world and that no one approach of philosophical analysis and explanation of their concepts can suffice to clarify them conceptually. Religions are not all simply an instance of belief in God or “the Holy”, “the numinous”, “the sacred”, or any single concept around which religion is supposed to revolve. Religions differ almost as languages differ, and no one of them is the “mother” of them all or even necessarily superior to any others in the sense of being more “developed.
We know now as well that religion and culture are inextricably entwined: religion gives culture its meanings and its particular shape. We must listen to the anthropologist and the sociologist if we are to understand any particular religion, even if philosophy goes beyond sociology to inquire into the transcendental world that lies behind any social-cultural structure.
Moreover, postmodern thinkers have rejected the foundationalism of a philosophy of religion that seeks the ultimate foundation of any claim of knowledge of reality.
Thus, “God” as a foundation of religion has been rejected in the light of those religions that are not theistic and in which a metaphysical concept of God is not possible.
This course is more accurately entitled “Philosophy of Theology”, because we are specifically interested in the philosophical thought exploring the Christian faith. We are not going to try to use philosophy to prove the truth of anything in the Christian faith, nor are we going to view philosophy as the enemy of religious faith. We are going to examine the various roles given to philosophy in the history of the Christian faith, though we will view these historical positions as potential positions for any

era. In the context of these various positions we can examine some of the typical philosophical issues and arguments that arise when certain positions are taken, such as arguments for the existence of God, the concept of mystery in regard to the incarnation, the Eucharist, etc., and the nature and man both as sinner and saved.
B. Varieties of the Philosophy of Religion
Charlesworth asserts that there are 5 types of relations between philosophy and religion (or, in our case, theology). How does he derive these 5 types of relations?
He is not clear about why there can only be 5 as well as the 5 he maintains. One might suppose that these are logical variations. Thus, logically, Philosophy can be the ground of theology, Theology the ground of philosophy, theology and philosophy can be separate ventures, and they can be mutually supportive or absorbed into cultural presumptions. H. Richard Neibuhr does a similar analysis of the relation between the church and society, defining 5 types of relations.
But rather than logical types, structures that can be a priori predicated of many relations, we can see these types as derived in two ways:
First, phenomenologically. Phenomenology is a philosophical methodology that examines the structure of any phenomenon. Thus, if we consider the appearance of an organized theological tradition as a phenomenon (in the domain of religious experience), we can work to reduce it to its bare structure (without all sorts of cultural, social, psychological, and other philosophical presuppositions). In some historical periods, a certain structural relation between philosophy and theology may predominate, while in another period another structure may be visible. Here historical and phenomenological analysis go hand in hand, though Charlesworth never achieves his typology in any explicit way. We may consider that they are in some way distinguished by logical, phenomenological, and historical means. We are more interested in this course is how the functional relation between philosophy and theology than in achieving the typologies in themselves.
The 5 typologies are as follows:
1. Philosophy grounds us in and leads us toward a religious mode of life, so that philosophy is a “way of life” (e.g., stoicism and Epicureanism). No theological position is acceptable that does not pass the bar of philosophical thinking, and philosophical concepts are applied to life circumstances to provide a system of meaning, sense of things, and ethical direction. Philosophy shades off into a religion or a distinctive type of theology in a western tradition. The following philosophers are examples: Plato and the Platonists (Plotinus and the neo-Platonists), Spinoza, and Hegel.
2. Theology, grounded in faith, is preeminent; philosophy’s role is to defend the articles of faith derived from Christian revelation. This can be done in a variety of ways: proving theological truths philosophically, showing that theology does not

contradict otherwise held philosophical conceptions, and taking the “kinks” that prevent faith out of our conceptual fabric. We can also simply show that what we know is not what God is (via negative), thus establishing a region of knowledge defined by faith that is not contradicted by any rational conception. Thus, philosophy makes faith possible, and faith does not intrude on the legitimate grounds of rational thought. Prominent examples here are Origen (father of typological theology), Augustine (“Credo ut intelligam”), and especially Aquinas (via negative) and the positive contribution of Aristotelian philosophy.
3. The third approach to theology is the Kantian approach. Philosophy actually reduces us to the rejection of all metaphysics, so that one cannot assert or deny the reality of God. Philosophy simply makes room for religion or theological thinking.
For Kant, this involves seeing God as a demand of ethical life, a condition that makes practical philosophy possible. Rational philosophical thought comes to a dead end in such a way that faith is not only made possible but actually serves a function in completing what rational thought cannot attain. John Henry Newman uses the concept of conscience in a similar way, viewing conscience not as a proof of a superior being but as an intuition into the being of God.
4. The fourth approach to the philosophy of religion sees the role of philosophy as a purely analytical and meta-logical one. The various domains of language have different conditions for the meaningfulness of language use within them, and philosophy clarifies how these domains work. It is not interested in ontological speculation or proof of what exists and what does not. It speaks not in the
“material” mode but in the “linguistic” mode. That is, it speaks about how we speak and, thus, clarifies what we mean. But it no longer concerns itself with the reference or object of speech, e.g. God. A.J. Ayer takes this approach but reduces meaning to what can be said in terms of experience, especially as it bears upon science.
Wittgenstein recognizes that the various “language games” have legitimacy in their own rights and does not reduce them to a form of positivism. For him the purpose of philosophy is to remind us of how we use words in the “home” of a language game and not to provide explanations of the world. Theological language, based on faith and the experience of the community of believers, expresses that faith in ways that are meaningful to believers. It does not provide proofs to unbelievers or wallow in skepticism. It simply takes language as the medium of our life and experience, taking its own criteria for what can be meaningfully said and thought.
5. The phenomenon of “postmodernism” constitutes the 5 th approach to the role philosophy plays in religion and theology. Charlesworth identifies Martin Heidegger and Jacques Derrida as postmodern thinkers, though they approach theology in very different ways. Heidegger seeks to understand the meaning of Being in terms of our history and culture, which provide us a chosen destiny. No “truth” of one historicalcultural context, including ways of understanding God in metaphysical ways, can capture the articulation of Being as revealed through Dasein. Derrida opposes all
“foundationalism”, including the concept of God as being the ground of all beings.
But this opposition is not atheism; it is above all contexts, viewing them as

mediators of the way we think within particular cultural, social, and historical situations. We cannot grasp God conceptually through philosophy or theology, but we can experience a kind of mystical grasp of God, as does Meister Eckhart).